Daniel Braniss wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 2015, at 3:21 PM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> >
> > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Christopher Forgeron
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> FYI, I can regularly hit 9.3 Gib/s with my Intel X520-DA2's and FreeBSD
> >>> 10.1. Before 10.1 it w
On 08/17/2015 12:53 PM, Antony Uspensky wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
>
>> So -L does fix the problem - sort of. The machine picks up the file as
>> additional swap on boot just fine. HWOEVER, when I try to reboot or shut
>> down the host, I get a panic telling me some noise
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
So -L does fix the problem - sort of. The machine picks up the file as
additional swap on boot just fine. HWOEVER, when I try to reboot or shut
down the host, I get a panic telling me some noise about not being able
to shutdown swap for some reason.
T
On 2015-08-16, Ian Lepore wrote:
> I wonder: is there a reason to not enable all (or most of) the refclocks
> in base and in ports?
I guess it isn't very elegant to enable clock drivers if nobody
knows whether they work or whether the hardware was ever produced
in series or whether external serv
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:49:57PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote:
> qemu-sbruno) doesn't support all our supported platforms, especially the
> multitude of ARM platforms, so holes in our auto-generated config.h support
> will exist.
I believe that the userspace arm ABI is not that variable. There co
On 17 August 2015 at 18:32, Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2015 9:22 AM, "Damien Fleuriot" wrote:
> >
> > Hello list,
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm seeing this very peculiar behaviour between 2 10-STABLE boxes.
> >
> > Host A is CARP Master with advskew 20 and runs 10.2-BETA1 from 10/07
> > Host B is
On Aug 17, 2015 9:22 AM, "Damien Fleuriot" wrote:
>
> Hello list,
>
>
>
> I'm seeing this very peculiar behaviour between 2 10-STABLE boxes.
>
> Host A is CARP Master with advskew 20 and runs 10.2-BETA1 from 10/07
> Host B is CARP Backup with advskew 150 and runs 10.2-PRERELEASE from 12/08
>
>
> W
Hello list,
I'm seeing this very peculiar behaviour between 2 10-STABLE boxes.
Host A is CARP Master with advskew 20 and runs 10.2-BETA1 from 10/07
Host B is CARP Backup with advskew 150 and runs 10.2-PRERELEASE from 12/08
When I configure CARP in rc.conf on host B, it becomes Master on boot,
On 8 June 2015 at 12:13, Pete French wrote:
> > I did this a while ago - and it actually worked.
> > (CARP between 9 and 10).
> >
> > I think I have each IP assigned its own VHID, though.
>
> Thanks for this, someone else has confimred that 10 orks with multiple IP's
> per VHID, so I am good to g
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 05:44:37PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> On 17 August 2015 at 13:54, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:49:27PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> >
> >> On 17 August 2015 at 13:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> >>
> >> > In any case, for 10Gb expect abou
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 06:50:22PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 07:16:03PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been trying to update several of my FreeBSD 10.1 amd64 VM to
> > 10.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update and have been failing with an incorr
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 07:16:03PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been trying to update several of my FreeBSD 10.1 amd64 VM to
> 10.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update and have been failing with an incorrect hash
> error.
>
> This is what happens with a plain vanilla 10.1-RELEASE v
On 17 August 2015 at 13:54, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:49:27PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
>
>> On 17 August 2015 at 13:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>>
>> > In any case, for 10Gb expect about 1200MGB/s.
>>
>> Your usage of units is confusing. Above you claim you expe
> On Aug 17, 2015, at 3:21 PM, Rick Macklem wrote:
>
> Daniel Braniss wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Christopher Forgeron
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> FYI, I can regularly hit 9.3 Gib/s with my Intel X520-DA2's and FreeBSD
>>> 10.1. Before 10.1 it was less.
>>>
>>
>> this is NOT iperf/3 w
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-May/074801.html
The cure would be to use your own caching DNS resolver (configured
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-May/074801.html
The cure would be to use your own caching DNS resolver (configured
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:27:41AM +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> hi,
> I have a host (Dell R730) with both cards, connected to an HP8200
> switch at 10Gb.
> when writing to the same storage (netapp) this is what I get:
> ix0:~130MGB/s
> mlxen0
Daniel Braniss wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Christopher Forgeron
> > wrote:
> >
> > FYI, I can regularly hit 9.3 Gib/s with my Intel X520-DA2's and FreeBSD
> > 10.1. Before 10.1 it was less.
> >
>
> this is NOT iperf/3 where i do get close to wire speed,
> it’s NFS writes, i.e., a
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015, Bob Bishop wrote:
Or run tcpdump for port 53; also curious if it might be an IPv4 vs. IPv6
issue?
I saw the issue on machines with IPv4/IPv6 and IPv4 only.
i have tried with preference set to ipv4 and ipv6. Both fail similarly. Have
not tried ipv4 or ipv6 only t
> On 16 Aug 2015, at 23:08, Bjoern A. Zeeb
> wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Aug 2015, at 21:16 , Christian Kratzer wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
your upstream DNS forwarder if you
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:49:27PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> On 17 August 2015 at 13:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>
> > In any case, for 10Gb expect about 1200MGB/s.
>
> Your usage of units is confusing. Above you claim you expect 1200
I am use as topic starter and expect MeGaBytes per s
On 17 August 2015 at 13:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> In any case, for 10Gb expect about 1200MGB/s.
Your usage of units is confusing. Above you claim you expect 1200
million gigabytes per second, or 1.2 * 10^18 Bytes/s. I don't think
any known network interface can do that, including highly ex
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:27:41AM +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> >
> >> hi,
> >>I have a host (Dell R730) with both cards, connected to an HP8200
> >> swi
> On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Christopher Forgeron
> wrote:
>
> FYI, I can regularly hit 9.3 Gib/s with my Intel X520-DA2's and FreeBSD 10.1.
> Before 10.1 it was less.
>
this is NOT iperf/3 where i do get close to wire speed,
it’s NFS writes, i.e., almost real work :-)
> I used to tweak t
FYI, I can regularly hit 9.3 Gib/s with my Intel X520-DA2's and FreeBSD
10.1. Before 10.1 it was less.
I used to tweak the card settings, but now it's just stock. You may want to
check your settings, the Mellanox may just have better defaults for your
switch.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Slaw
> On Aug 17, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:27:41AM +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>
>> hi,
>> I have a host (Dell R730) with both cards, connected to an HP8200
>> switch at 10Gb.
>> when writing to the same storage (netapp) this is what I g
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:27:41AM +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> hi,
> I have a host (Dell R730) with both cards, connected to an HP8200
> switch at 10Gb.
> when writing to the same storage (netapp) this is what I get:
> ix0:~130MGB/s
> mlxen0
hi,
I have a host (Dell R730) with both cards, connected to an HP8200
switch at 10Gb.
when writing to the same storage (netapp) this is what I get:
ix0:~130MGB/s
mlxen0 ~330MGB/s
this is via nfs/tcpv3
I can get similar (
28 matches
Mail list logo
